ArticleBioinformation2026
Traditional versus compressive implant osseointegration after immediate placement: A randomized histomorphometric study.
Article in Bioinformation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Immediate implant placement challenges primary stability and osseointegration in compromised extraction sockets with large gap distances or thin buccal plates. Therefore, it is of interest to compare 40 conventional tapered implants versus 40 compressive-thread implants in 80 patients. Primary outcomes included histomorphometric bone-to-implant contact (BIC%) and bone area fraction occupancy (BAFO%) at 4 months, plus ISQ stability values. Compressive implants showed superior BIC% (68.4 ± 8.7% vs 52.3 ± 9.1%, p<0.001), BAFO% (61.2 ± 7.4% vs 48.9 ± 8.2%, p<0.001), ISQ gains and less buccal resorption (0.41 ± 0.22 vs 1.08 ± 0.39, p<0.001). Compressive macrogeometry advances immediate placement by optimizing early osseointegration and bone preservation in high-risk sites.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.